arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2103.09031

Evaluation of a Bi-Directional Methodology for Automated Assessment of Compliance to Continuous Application of Clinical Guidelines, in the Type 2 Diabetes-Management Domain

Avner Hatsek·Irit Hochberg·Deeb Daoud Naccache·Aya Biderman·Yuval Shahar
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We evaluated the DiscovErr system, in which we had previously implemented a new methodology for assessment of compliance to continuous application of evidence-based clinical guidelines, based on a bidirectional search from the guideline objectives to the patient's longitudinal data, and vice versa. We compared the system comments on 1584 transactions regarding the management, over a mean of 5.23 years, of 10 randomly selected Type 2 diabetes patients, to those of two diabetes experts and a senior family practitioner. After providing their own comments, the experts assessed both the correctness (precision) and the importance of each of the DiscovErr system comments. The completeness (recall or coverage) of the system was computed by comparing its comments to those made by the experts. The system made 279 comments. The experts made 181 unique comments. The completeness of the system was 91% compared to comments made by at least two experts, and 98% when compared to comments made by all three. 172 comments were evaluated by the experts for correctness and importance: All 114 medication-related comments, and a random 35% of the 165 monitoring-related comments. The system's correctness was 81% compared to comments judged as correct by both diabetes experts, and 91% compared to comments judged as correct by a diabetes expert and at least as partially correct by the other. 89% of the comments were judged as important by both diabetes experts, 8% were judged as important by one expert, 3% were judged as less important by both experts. The completeness scores of the three experts (compared to the comments of all experts plus the validated system comments) were 75%, 60%, and 55%; the experts' correctness scores (compared to their majority) were respectively 99%, 91%, and 88%. Conclusion: Systems such as DiscovErr can assess the quality of continuous guideline-based care.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Avner Hatsek, Irit Hochberg, Deeb Daoud Naccache, Aya Biderman, Yuval Shahar. 2021-03-16. Evaluation of a Bi-Directional Methodology for Automated Assessment of Compliance to Continuous Application of Clinical Guidelines, in the Type 2 Diabetes-Management Domain. https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.09031

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗